Small Families vs Large Families, A CLASH of Viewpoints & Ideologies

There's been an unwritten war for quite a while. This war isn't racial, ethnic nor religious. It's somewhat related to economic class but it isn't based solely on this. This war is between small & large families. Each family type is VERY different.

There's been contention, even dissension between small & large families. Although there're differences within each family type, there's a unifying factor regarding each family type. Each family type is different in terms of culture & psychology.

Small & large families view each other suspectly. Small families see large families as bulwarks of a less enlightened, more backward era while large families view small families as hedonistic, extravagant, materialistic, & selfish.

Small & large families have different beliefs as to what constitutes family. Each family type teaches different things. Small families stress higher human needs while large families stress the rudiments, struggle, basic survival & nothing more.

It seems that large families are very judgmental & prejudiced against small families for one reason or another. They view small families as soft, decadent, & worse. They argue that people from small families don't know how to struggle like them.

Small Family vs Large Family, A Clash of Differing Perspectives and Outlooks

There has been an unspoken war for a long time. This was has been ongoing for quite a while. This was has nothing to do with race, ethnicity, or even religion yet it is as evident as those aforementioned components. This was done to do somewhat with socioeconomic class. However, this war is based upon mostly lifestyles, psychology, perspective and outlooks. This was has to do with family systems and structures. To put it more specifically, this was is about certain systems and structures of families.

For quite a while, there has been contention, even dissension between small and large families. Small(1-2 children per family) and large families(6 and more children per family) have different and divergent, even diametrically opposite viewpoints. Each family type has a different culture and psychology as to its approach, attitude, consensus, and general construct. Although no two small and large families are alike, each family type has unifying factors in common. Yes, there is war between small and large families in terms of consciousness, culture, lifestyle, mindset, and psychology. Small families view large families as bulwarks from another, less enlightened era while large families consider small families to be the ultimate of hedonistic behavior, extravagance, materialism, and ultimate selfishness.

There are beliefs, even perceptions as to what family is from both small and large families. Small families and large families view things oppositely. Small families stress higher human needs, accomplishments, and success while large families main emphasis is on the more rudimentary human needs, struggle, basic survival, and nothing beyond that. Those in small families and large families have different influences as a result of belonging to their respective family of origin.

It seems that large families, for the most part, are highly judgmental and prejudiced against small families. To those from large families, small families are perceived as soft and decadent. They further argue that children from small families have it too good and too easy. They further remark that people in small families have no concept of struggle and doing without as they do. They seem to react viscerally against small families, especially in terms of their lifestyle and socioeconomic choices. However, they reserve their most vitriol and venom against only children. They see only children as the small family prototype of indulgence and self-centeredness.

The Attitude of Large Families Towards Only Children

People from large families have very strong opinions & prejudices about those from small families. However, their strongest opinion & prejudices are reserved for only children who're as the familial antithesis of them & what they represent.

Many people from large families have many perceptions about only children, viewing them as spoiled & never having to undergo any type of privation. They maintain that only children lead such a charmed life in comparison to theirs.

Many people from large families believe that only children are peculiar, even odd because they haven't siblings. They feel that only children don't have family on that basis alone. They even consider only children to be incomplete people.

Only Children in the Large Family Mind

People from large families have very strong opinions about those from small families. They look upon those from small families with scorn, even derision. It is the perception of those from large families that their counterparts from small families are somehow inferior and do not possess the stamina that they do because they have not endured nor underwent hardships and struggle as they have. They consider those from small families lazy, weak, and ineffectual because they did not have it as tough as they did. They oftentimes feel morally superior because they have experienced deprivations.

The average person from a large family has such vitriol against those from small families. The most vitriolic remarks and prejudice of those from large families are often reserved for only children. In their view, only children are viewed as the prototypical antithesis of them. Many people from large families perceive only children as having a life of easy, without any type of struggle and deprivation. They furthermore see only children as having a very easy life. When they inquire if a person is an only child and he/she answers in the affirmative, they sneer that he/she probably is spoiled or derisively assert that they hope he/she is not spoiled.

There are people from large families who have an animus of one form of another against only children. They find it really strange, even peculiar that people do not have many siblings like they do. If that is not enough, they find it quite perplexing, even weird that there are people who do not have any no siblings at all. In their purview, how do only children exist and have a life without siblings. They oftentimes look down upon only children because in their purview, they have no family as siblings are equated to family. They may see only children as incomplete people because they have no siblings as they believe that everyone should have siblings in order to be complete people.

Really CAN'T Fathom This At All

People from large families view only children as having diametrically different outlooks & perspectives. They find it extremely difficult to understand the lifestyle & familial environment of only children. They don't see that others are different.

People from large families state that only children are spoiled & selfish because they never had to struggle nor do without. They, on the other hand, HAD to constantly divide & share things w/ a large number of siblings.

Many people from large families view only children as mollycoddled babies because they receive ALL the attention & perks while they had to fiercely compete for what was scare parental time, attention, & resources,being grateful if they received that.

People From Large Families Cannot Really Fathom Only Chilldren

People from large families view only children as so diametrically different from them in terms of attitude, outlook, and perspectives. They really cannot understand how people can live without siblings. They also find it difficult to comprehend that there are those with very different lifestyles from them. They are of the belief that people should have the same lifestyle and struggles as they have. They rationalize that hardships and struggle make children develop faster and appreciate what they have. They contend that people should have and live on what is absolutely necessary and no more.

People from large families maintain that only children particularly never had to struggle as they did nor did without. They look upon the latter as spoiled and having it so easy because they had everything or almost everything at their fingertips. They further maintain that only children are woefully selfish and self-centered because they never had to divide anything among a large number of siblings as they had to. They point out that only children had individualized attention while they are lucky if they had any attention at all. They elucidated that they had to raise themselves and fight for what little parental attention and favor they got.

To people from large families, only children are just mollycoddled babies who always get the attention and perks. They further argue that what very little they obtained and received from their parents whether it was time, love, care, and/or material and economic resources, they had to compete fiercely with other siblings for them. They go as far to assert that in their families, those who are usually older were left by the wayside while the younger ones got more parental attention and resources. Their contention is that while only children endlessly received, they endlessly did without or if they received, it was so miniscule and insignificant in comparison to what only children received.

There's ENVY in the Air

People from large families are quite fond of rationalizing that only children are spoiled & selfish as a latent & subconscious envy of them & their lifestyle. They'd to struggle while the latter oftentimes DIDN'T, having it relatively easy.

People from large families saw how advantageous only children & their lifestyle are in stark contrast to theirs. While they had to struggle for the basics,only children's parents could well afford to provide them w/many advantages & opportunities.

As people from large families become aware of the more affluent lifestyle of only children, instead of accepting such a lifestyle as acceptable, they saw it as deviant thus becoming more entrenched in a poverty & scarcity mindset & psychology.

People from large families envy the close parent-child relationship of only children & their parents. They never experienced close parent-child relationships, being left mostly w/their siblings to do the best they can emotionally.

People From Large Families Are Unknowingly Envious of Only Children

People from large families are quite fond of rationalizing that only children are spoiled, selfish, and even mollycoddled by their parents as a disguise of their latent and subconscious envy of the latter and their lifestyle. The average lifestyle of those from large families is categorized as one of constant economic struggle. Poverty and impoverishment is extremely common in large families. There simply is never enough money to go around and cover a large number of children. It is quite common for those from large families to have gone without, even the necessities.

On the contrary, only children grew up in economically affluent circumstances. If they were not economically affluent, they were near it or at least economically viable. They had monies allotted to them for the necessities and beyond. It was not usual for only children to have many of advantages and accoutrements that money can buy. They also had individualized time, care, and attention from their parents. They and their parents did not have to struggle day to day economically and worry if there would be even enough of the basics. People from large families saw that the lifestyle of only children was far different from theirs. They saw how luxurious the latter lifestyle was in stark contrast to theirs of penurious struggle.

So instead of realizing that there were affluent lifestyles that did not involve struggle and doing without, people from large families expressed covert envy, indicating that people who lived such affluent lifestyles are hedonistic, spoiled, selfish, and even materialistic. They remark that only children are spoiled and selfish because the latter's parents could afford to give and provide them a lifestyle beyond subsistence and struggle unlike their parents. So instead of recognizing a more affluent lifestyle as legitimate and normative, they viewed such a lifestyle as totally deviant, becoming more entrenched in a consciousness, mindset, and psychology of deprivation, want, and lack.

People from large families are furthermore envious of the individualized time and attention that only children received from their parents while they received very little or no individualized or even overall time and attention from their parents. Many people from large families cannot understand the very close relationship only children have with their parents. They interpreted such parent-child closeness to be mollycoddling children when in fact such relationships are quite normative. They are used to little if any parental involvement in their life, being mostly left in the company of their siblings, emotionally scrambling the best way they can. They saw what only children received from their parents, being envious of the care and love the former received but adamantly refusing to admit this.

Anger, Even MISPLACED Anger

People from large families are prejudiced against only children because of anger. They're angry because they struggled for economic crumbs while only children had it made economically. They felt that they're worthy of such opportunities.

People from large families are prejudiced against only children because of the opportunity they didn't & will never have. They never gotten a break in their lives, always being stuck at society's periphery, on the outside always looking in.

Some from large families who display prejudice against only children as a misplacement of their anger at their parents who put them in such dire economic circumstances during their formative years.They rather blame only children than their parents.

People From Large Families Are Prejudiced Against Only Children Because of Anger

People from large families are prejudiced against only children and their advantages because of their misplaced anger. They are angry at only children for the opportunities they felt they should somehow received. They are also angry because they struggled from day to day while only children had every conceivable opportunity handed to them. They contended that it was grossly unfair for them to live at a level of bare subsistence, pinching pennies and always cutting economic corners while only children seem to never have had an economic care in the world.

Many people from large families have an animus against only children because the latter had lifestyles and opportunities that they were not going to nor never will receive in their particular lifetime. They viewed themselves as being stuck on the periphery, always looking in at the societal cookie jar. They never seem to have had any opportunities while in their purview, only children had, got, and received opportunities left and right. They felt that they were on the very short end of the proverbial stick and more likely to get the shaft, being left to struggle and barely survive as they usually did.

Many people from large families display prejudice against only children because of misplaced anger towards their parents because the latter put them in such bleakly dire economic circumstances. They are angry as a result of being poor and having to struggle in their formative years. So instead of being angry at their parents, they misplace their anger, taking out their frustrations on only children as they had it so much better than they did economically and in terms of other opportunities.

Conclusion

People from large families have looked upon those from small families with suspicion because of different outlooks, perspectives, attitudes, and lifestyles. However, people from large families tend to be virulently prejudiced against only children in addition to having many misperceptions about them. To those from large families, only children symbolize the complete antithesis of who they are in terms of family and lifestyle. There is also underlying envy in terms of economic lifestyles and never granted opportunities regarding those from large families in relation to only children.

Comments

No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.

sending

Gillian 14 months ago

I am an only child and pregnant with my third. My childhood was financially well off but terribly likely without siblings and older parents who didnt see much value in friends outside of going to school. I felt often isolated from people around my own age, and with my family it was by design. Only children don't have hunky dory lives all the time either. I'm grateful for the opportunities I had but still feel cheated out of something.

Author

Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years agofrom the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Ahorseback, thank you for stopping by and for your commentary. It is greatly appreciated.

ahorseback 2 years ago

Grace , Okay now this could be just a bit generalizing !? Lol, I agree with a lot of this , I came from a large and rather poor family , I don't really know , but Is it not simply an emotional envy of "what the other person has "? I know this , we are ALL emotionally centered around our own basic understandings of our own life experiences so when we hear or ,better yet , experience an emotional envy or bitterness perhaps , we tend to form an instant opinion of things we really now little about . I have , at one time or another , felt everything that you've mentioned above , probably from a bitterness of experiencing poverty while many around me seemed so much "better off ". I actually believe that it's irresponsible and highly risky to the emotional well beings of the children -to purposely raise a large family and I will never get over that belief . I commend you for a very informative hub !

Author

Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years agofrom the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Nadine, thank you for stopping by and responding.

Nadine May 2 years agofrom Cape Town, Western Cape, South Africa

This is the first time that I read about the different perceptions people grow up with due to a family structure. I know that as a child I often wished I had more brothers and sisters. I often romanticized what a large would be like, having only one younger sister. My first husband came from a large family, seven children, and they accepted me in their family as if I always belonged there.

peachy 2 years agofrom Home Sweet Home

i agree, my mom in law has 9 kids, All her adult grown children are always protecting themselves for their own advantages. They are not helping each other, always each other wealth, health, house, vehicles and even not sharing thier mom

Author

Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years agofrom the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

I don't know about mk-ultra. I do believe that people should wait until exploring their sexuality and to enter relationships and marry. If people waited until their twenties to date and explore relationship options and wait until their thirties to marry and have children, many problems would be solved. Also, have small families 1-3 children so that children can receive the optimal parental attention, opportunities and each child receiving equal love. Furthermore in such families, the oldest does not have to parent his/her siblings like in large families.

Joshtheplumber 2 years ago

Thank you. In reference to your latest question, I don't have ten things to say about that but I will say this: my grandmother was 30 before having her first child and is now 97 and still going strong.

If people expect to live to 200, I'd say they should wait as long as possible to explore sexuality.

On another subject, according to the intelligence I've gathered, there are certain groups which ritually sexually abuse children for a variety of reasons. It's an offshoot of mk-ultra. Are you familiar with these things?

Author

Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years agofrom the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Your mother was an unfulfilled woman. She did not effectively learned the art of balance and perspective. She did not make the correct choices in life as relationships and parenting go in certain cases. Maybe she married before ascertaining who she actually was. Many women during the early 1960s married very young before knowing who they are as people. Also during that era, there was an emphasis on women becoming mothers although there were some who definitely were not interested in any aspect of motherhood but succumbed to the strongly pronounced pronatalist hype of the era-all women want to be mothers and if she didn't, something was seriously wrong with her. Well, this inculcation resulted in many women becoming mothers who actually should not be mothers in the first place. I believe that one has to be mature and prepared emotionally, financially, and psychologically before becoming a parent. Sadly, so many people are not thus prepared and children suffer regardless of family size. However, I staunchly believe that small families provide the best environment given intelligent, educated, aware, mature, and conscious parents for a child to grow up in, flourish, and become his/her best person.

P.S. At least your mother did the right thing in giving away her daughter while in college to a family who wanted her. So many women have children that they are unable to care for with horrific ramifications for their children. Somehow, I believe that there should be a mandatory license for parenthood as well as mandatory birth control.

Joshtheplumber 2 years ago

Being the expert you are, perhaps you can provide some sociological insight into my unique situation, Grace. My mother was one of 3 children in a middle class family as feminism and civil rights were the predominant focus of the day. In college, she had a daughter she felt was not able to take care of, so she gave it up for adoption. Later, she married a Black Panther Party member and had my older brother, but things didn't work out. By the time I came along, she was quite certain I would be a girl... Didn't happen. She convinced herself that I had a medical condition which caused me to vomit every time I was fed, so long story short, I starved to death as an infant.

Being hardheaded and stubborn as I am, I came back to life. She was not comfortable with being a housewife and left my father to raise my brother and I on her own, remaining single to this day. Since I could not replace the daughter which she correctly gave away, my punishment for being born a white heterosexual male has never ceased. I, despite being in a small middle class family, and even being an only child throughout my teen years, and having the best of opportunities life has to offer, continue to suffer from deep psychological issues and, while I am extremely bright and talented, continue to struggle and fail at life in general.

How does this rogue misfit fit into your perception of the ideal conditions to raise a child?

Author

Grace Marguerite Williams 2 years agofrom the Greatest City In The World-New York City, New York

Very darn proud to be an only also. That is why I write on behalf of us onlies. I am doing my part to destroy negative myths and perceptions about only children. Being an only child is THE WAY to go. We have opportunities that others simply DON'T have. Kim, thank you stopping by and adding to the discussion.

Kimberley Clarke 2 years agofrom England

Very interesting indeed - I am an only child! Proud of it, too...though there's not a lot I can do about it! I am quite a sensitive soul, so I think I was meant to be an only child. Vying for parental attention among brothers or sisters would have broken my little heart!